Re: Siberians
- To: i*@rt66.com
- Subject: Re: Siberians
- From: C*@aol.com
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 06:08:42 -0400
In a message dated 96-09-12 03:39:42 EDT, you write:
> I've also noticed that MCEwen introductions don't do very well for me
>- and I'm blaming that on the heat!
You are, of course, correct in observing that Siberians do better in areas
that have cold winters. I became very much aware of this when I first saw
Siberian irises growing in coastal California...I had the terribly mistaken
belief that all irises grow better in California. After the San Jose
convention some years ago I realized that Siberian and Japanese irises
perform better in northern Virginia...much better with much less effort. At
last, here were irises that we in the East could grow better than
Californians could!
Re McEwen Siberians...are you writing about his tetraploids? Most of
McEwen's introductions do fine for me (exclude HUBBARD which I do not
consider a "good" cultivar even though when performing well is very
beautiful). BUT for the most part diploids are more vigorous and increase
better than the tetraploids. With the Japanese irises, the difference is
even more pronounced than with the Siberians. There are some tetraploid
Payne winners that I simply cannot grow, e.g. RASPBERRY RIMMED. For people
starting out with Siberians or Japanese I always recommend they start with
diploids to ensure success. Clarence Mahan in VA
